[Gay State Conservative]

IANAL but...I think I've read that SCOTUS has ruled that the police need the consent of *all* owners of a particular item/place before they can search without a warrant.If I'm correct on that Humma (on behalf of her girlfriend) could claim that,as marital property,the PC was her property as well...thus "illegal search".

Yah,I know....I should stick to brain surgery and not try to practice law.

And no,I'm not a brain surgeon either

[DuncanWaring]

.I think I've read that SCOTUS has ruled that the police need the consent of *all* owners...

That may be correct, but I was under the impression that only the consent of *one* owner was needed.

[reformedliberal]

It varies by state.

I’m not a lawyer, either, but I know of a case in another state concerning child porn and sexual acts and communication with a minor in a different state where the wife’s computer was confiscated. No consent asked or given. Went to appeal on “Fruit of the poisonous tree” and appeal was denied because the minor victim filed a complaint and the perp took a plea (multiple instances,indicted on only one). This was actually 2 cases with two convictions, one Federal child porn and one child sexual abuse in the state of the victim. Evidence was confiscated in the perp’s state of residence at request of Feds and minor’s state of residence.

Two 10-year sentences, one federal, one state, consecutive, not concurrent.